[lkml]   [2007]   [Oct]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: OOM notifications
    Ulrich Drepper wrote:

    > I agree. Applications shouldn't be expected to be yet more complicated
    > and have different levels of low memory handling. You might want to
    > give a process a second shot at handling SIGDANGER but after that's it's
    > all about preparation for a shutdown.

    I disagree. From an embedded viewpoint it would be nice to have a
    "please free up memory", then a "we really need memory NOW", then
    finally the kernel oom killer.

    The advantage of the middle message is that it allows userspace to do
    smarter things if it wants to (for instance, if there is an overall
    system manager or some such thing, it could do a better job of
    restarting tasks than the kernel oom killer since it knows the relative
    importance of tasks).

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2007-10-19 07:19    [W:0.021 / U:90.988 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site